User talk:ClueBot Commons/Archives/2008/July

What do you mean?
What do you mean I edited Xonto-? I Did not either.Veraladeramanera (talk) 01:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello
This is not vandalism. For Reserves and Youth Team Steaua II Bucureşti go to Steaua II Bucureşti and for notable players go to: Steaua players. --89.33.128.107 (talk) 17:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm 'n Luv (Wit a Stripper)
Why did you remove my edit to this article?-24.125.169.130 (talk) 18:24, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Ridiculous Vandalism
Somebody has been put ridiculous statement on the Edline page, I tried to re-edit the page the best I could. Could someone try to restore the important infomation that was on the page. Thank You. Sorry, I signed this previously without signing in. I am TonyO13. TonyO13 (talk) 20:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC) TonyO13

Banana / Talk:Banana
for some reason cluebot only reverted the article move, and left the talk page in place, what with the hagger, and the epic lulz, and such. – xeno cidic ( talk ) 01:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Asteroid page created by ClueBot with empty fields
I ran across a page apparently created by ClueBot 8319_Antiphanes reading:

"8319 Antiphanes (3365 T-2) is a Main-belt Asteroid discovered on,  by  at ."

I assumed you wanted this corrected?? And the same information in the infobox?

Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 04:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)


 * P.S., This the fourth asteroid page I've seen with this issue.

Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 04:42, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Astrology
I see the subject interests you. I don't know if this is from an observers POV or as a practitioner, but in 1976 when I held a vigil at the Liberty Memorial Mall in Kansas City after the Republican National Convention (Ref: Kathleen Patterson, 'Prophet Chooses Park for Vigil', The Kansas City Times, 13 September, 1976, pg 3A and Robert W. Butler, 'Prophet Plans Appeal of Conviction', The Kansas City Times, 2 November, 1976) I enjoyed frequent access to drop into the studio of a local night radio talk show. One time an astrologist by the name of Gars Austin was on the line from Texas giving brief chart readings based only on the birth date of callers. Coming up to a news break and not knowing me, from the studio I asked if he could do a more in depth reading based on my birth at 8am Sunday morning in Montreal May 21, 1944. The talk show host, the listeners and I were amazed with what he came back with. I asked if the charts showed anything significant around February 1, 1975 the date of my Spiritual resurrection. He didn't know anything about that. We were all surprised when he said, "According to my chart, on that date you had a very powerful Spiritual experience." From that time I had to give more credence to what is written in the stars. Peace DoDaCanaDa (talk) 13:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

38.117.139.174
The Bot is reporting vandalism from this I.P. but I believe that a number of other users also work from this I.P. as well. I have my own login, but have not edited for three months now.--38.117.139.174 (talk) 20:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Problems?
I think ClueBot might be going out-of-the-line, and I have a few things to say: First, ClueBot reverted good faith edits edits by User:Sceptre and User:Richard Harvey, both established users, and named it vandalism. Secondly, on this revert, the user was warned about redirecting the article to a non-existant page, and the warning, to me, is incorrect. How would test edits be considered vandalism? I warn all users whom I revert with a proper warning, whereas if I successfully reverted that edit, I would have warned the user with Staples Center ~. I really think this should be fixed sometime soon, or people will think Wikipedia is not trustworthy. I apologise if this statement wasn't helpful. Schfifty Three  00:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Erm, that shouldn't have happened. The API has been messing up lately, essentially lying to ClueBot about facts (like edit count, content, etc).  I believe it has been fixed now, so that should no longer be an issue.  -- Cobi(t 02:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Dates
Hello,

For some reason ClueBot missed out on the fact that the month and year was already a section for this article, that is to say it made a new section with the same heading and a new warning (in fact it should be warning # 2 not warning # 1) diff User A1 (talk) 13:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Cluebot is unfair. Cluebot should be banned! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.115.25.186 (talk) 03:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

More problems
It looks like it might be having a few more problems - ClueBot is reverting edits on pages created by new users by the user. I really don't know why ClueBot would revert edits of new users' pages tagged for CSD. -- Schfifty Three  02:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:USURP edit Summary
Cluebot 4 made this edit where it rm a proposal but its summary was wrong. just thought you should know. thank-you,  Electrical  Experiment 18:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed. I was lazy not to update the edit summary to reflect the new code.  Thanks.  -- Cobi(t 20:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * your welcome  Electrical  Experiment 00:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

False negative
Your bot got a false negative today: 66.96.243.12 is an open proxy server (found at http://www.ipmask.org ), but your bot did not detect this. Antelan 05:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, 58.145.192.75 is a false negative (see http://www.socialnow.info/ ). Antelan  05:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It seriously doesn't detect 90% of open proxies, there's a reason people check and scan the IP's listed there. (hint: read the large notice placed at the direct top of the WP:OP page :] ) Another thing: it's rather difficult to tell whether or not there's a web-proxy running from an IP address even for people. Even harder for bots. Also note that the bot's results are just "clerk notice"s, and not a definitive check. Calvin 1998 (t-c) 05:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, understood. And don't get me wrong - I do appreciate the work the bot does. It just seems to me that the phrasing should possibly be different. For example, instead of making the text sound so definitive ("Not an open proxy") with that big blue checkmark, the bot's language should be more circumspect. There has been some confusion due to this wording. Antelan  05:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It also doesn't return "Tor exit node" if the Tor check/s come up positive :( but we don't get many Tor IP's anymore... Calvin 1998 (t-c) 05:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Wrong
I'm not sure where to so-called "report" my addition to the Kanye West forthcoming album article, but in fact it was titled "A Good Ass Job" before "Homecoming". Robots are apparently just as bad at censoring as people are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.100.165 (talk) 20:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I have reverted ClueBot's edit, and added an tag at the top. Schfifty  Three  20:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

ClueBot VI's archiving of WP:CHU/U
The Bot seems to be doing a good job on the WP:CHU/U archiving but is perhaps a bit fast. Particularly for rejected requests, I'd like them to stay up for a bit so people can see the outcome. Might I suggest waiting until 12 hrs after a request is completed and 48 hrs after one is rejected before archiving them? WjBscribe 00:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll see about that. It shouldn't be too hard.  -- Cobi(t 00:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, what about having the bot leave a notice on the user's talk page on archival? -- Cobi(t 01:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I'd prefer the delay - sometimes third parties point out that it was wrongly declined and it's easiest to deal with if the request hasn't been archived already. WJBscribe (talk) 00:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll see about implementing that :) -- Cobi(t 04:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ :)  -- Cobi(t 04:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Erm ... so I thought. I think I have fixed it now.  -- Cobi(t 10:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

False Positives
Yesterday, I had looked through the archives of ClueBot's "false positives", and was kind of stunned: January &mdash; 219, February &mdash; 211, March &mdash; 163, April – 137, May &mdash; 176, June &mdash; 164. I somehow think the core engine rewrite has not been completed for over three months. And, I also think ClueBot is programmed to revert anything higher than 10,000, even if it is not vandalism. Schfifty Three  17:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * A lot of those are vandals saying something along the lines of "CLUEBOT SUCKZ!!". Even if they were all valid (they're not), ClueBot makes about 2,000 reverts per day, or about 60873 per month on average, that means 278 good reverts to 1 bad revert.  The core engine rewrite is mostly done, it just needs a nice, large training set, which is taking so long to compile (see this).  I am not sure what you mean by "higher than 10,000", but if you mean revert any edit removing more than 10,000 bytes, then the answer is no, it doesn't blindly revert.  If you mean any edit adding more than 10,000 bytes, then still, the answer is no, it doesn't blindly revert.   -- Cobi(t 20:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, if the training set is taking too long, Gurch made a tool that gets the IRC feed, shows it to you, and has three buttons (Vandalism, Good, Ignore or something like that) that automatically creates 2 lists of diffs in wiki-code that can be copy-pasted onto the training set pages. It could possibly be useful in hurrying up the process. Calvin 1998 (t-c) 20:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Cobi. But if a lot of them are vandals, shouldn't they be removed? Maybe they already were, but I thought that would be helpful. And, actually, I feel like nominating you for adminship because you and your bots are really great. :-) -- Schfifty Three  21:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

ClueBot's sandbox
Just a suggestion, ClueBot shouldn't warn a user for "vandalising" in its sandbox, thanks :) 125.238.96.162 (talk) 04:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Missing bot flag in edit summaries
I was wondering why you bot is not setting the bot flag as part of the edit summary as is done by all of the other bots running in Wikipedia? see diff Dbiel (Talk) 18:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe the bot flag only shows up in watchlists and recent changes, it won't show up in the history or the diff. – xeno  ( talk ) 18:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I was actually refering to my watch list,
 * ClueBot example:
 * (diff) (hist) . . m User:Jimbo Wales‎; 18:36 . . (-79,603) . . ClueBot (Talk | contribs) (Reverting possible vandalism by Sorenus to version by Seicer. False positive? Report it. Thanks, User:ClueBot. (443796) (Bot))
 * Example from other bots:
 * (diff) (hist) . . mb Books of the Bible‎; 16:40 . . (+31) . . Thijs!bot (Talk | contribs) (robot Adding: simple:Books of the Bible)
 * (diff) (hist) . . mb Professional certification‎; 11:43 . . (+38) . . CarsracBot (Talk | contribs) (robot Adding: simple:Professional certification)
 * (diff) (hist) . . mb User talk:NawlinWiki‎; 08:21 . . (+270) . . SineBot (Talk | contribs) (Signing comment by Sshirokov - "")
 * (diff) (hist) . . b Columbia High School (Columbia, Illinois)‎; 20:40 . . (-34) . . ImageRemovalBot (Talk | contribs) (Removing deleted image)
 * Dbiel (Talk) 19:19, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The BAG previously decided that the bot should run without the bot flag. Because of a recent patch, the bot now does run with the flag, but, in keeping with the BAG's wishes, does not mark its edits as such.  -- Cobi(t 19:40, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Would you be so kind as to post this fact and the reason for it on the Bot's user page with a link (if possible) to the BAG decision as this does not follow standard bot policy. Dbiel (Talk) 21:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Anti-vandal bots have historically not even been flagged. The only reason ClueBot is flagged is because the software now allows flagged bots to decide whether or not to flag their edits.  See this and this.
 * Thanks for the links. Now I understand. The only real reason for not using the bot flag is to allow the edits to appear in the recent edit list. Which basicly says that anti-vandel bots are less trusted that other bots. Thanks for the assistance. Dbiel (Talk) 00:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Probably due to their higher propensity for false positives. – xeno  ( talk ) 01:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed. It is impossible for a bot that works off heuristics to be right 100% of the time, whereas a bot that removes redlinks from WP:SCV can be right all the time (provided that the API is always right).  -- Cobi(t 01:50, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Cluebot
Man, Cluebot does its job so fast that it cancels mine. How the heck am I going to propose my 2nd RfA? Ammar gerrard117 (talk) 04:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry clue bot. As of Sunday, July 20, 2008, I, Capz, will stop vandalizing Wikipedia. You know I love you, clue bot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Capz (talk • contribs) 19:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
I'm currently in process to improve an article on Vasai Road.After a few edits,I found there was some useful data lost in terms of vandalism by this ip : 64.104.137.101,whom you had previously warned of it.Now I want to get the data back without changing my edits.How do I do that using the history button? SidMilan (talk) 07:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Silly question, but it intrigues me nonetheless
What would happen if a non-administrator manually shut this bot down by clicking on the shutoff button? Nothing? Or would it work? I presume noting would happen, but hey clarification is nice :). A Prodigy (talk) 20:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The button is a link to Special:BlockIP/ClueBot, so for non-admins the page would display the "Unauthorized" error and do nothing. Non-admins can shut it off at the emergency non-admin shutoff page, however. Calvin 1998 (t-c) 21:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * OK thanks for that. A Prodigy (talk) 21:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Protecting against vandals should be implemented on the model of "strict scrutiny"
This bot's interpretation of any significant reduction in an article's size as "massdelete" vandalism seems to violate the User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles, in particular, part of point 2: Newcomers are always to be welcome. As noted there:
 * Any security measures to be implemented to protect the community against real vandals (and there are real vandals, who are already starting to affect us), should be implemented on the model of "strict scrutiny"...[which] ... means that any measures instituted for security must address a compelling community interest, and must be narrowly tailored to achieve that objective and no other.

As I noted in User:ClueBot/FalsePositives, i was moving a chunk of text from History of television to color television. I even added the text to the latter before removing it from the former. Under those circumstances the reversion was unwarranted. Cluebot's heuristics should be changed accordingly. 66.167.141.185 (talk) 02:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC).

Protecting against vandals should be implemented on the model of "strict scrutiny"
This bot's interpretation of any significant reduction in an article's size as "massdelete" vandalism seems to violate the User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles, in particular, part of point 2: Newcomers are always to be welcome. As noted there:
 * Any security measures to be implemented to protect the community against real vandals (and there are real vandals, who are already starting to affect us), should be implemented on the model of "strict scrutiny"...[which] ... means that any measures instituted for security must address a compelling community interest, and must be narrowly tailored to achieve that objective and no other.

As I noted in User:ClueBot/FalsePositives, i was moving a chunk of text from History of television to color television. I even added the text to the latter before removing it from the former. Under those circumstances the reversion was unwarranted. Cluebot's heuristics should be changed accordingly. 66.167.141.185 (talk) 02:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC).

ClueBot Commons userpages
I have just looked at the category for active bots on Wikipedia, and saw the ClueBots in there. Some of them have not edited at all and I don't consider that being currently active. I would have removed that category from the userpages for some of them, but they are all fully protected, so a sysop would have to do it.

I've also noticed that the Awards and Praise sections all seem to belong to User:ClueBot and not just one certain bot of Cobi's.

A 3rd thing: The userpages for all of the ClueBots have the exact same categories for each one, and I don't know why this has happened. These stats and stuff all come from User:ClueBot Commons/Userpage, and each page for each ClueBot is almost the same, in awards, in praise, and in categories. Even the extra ClueBots that Cobi created manually (ClueBots 7&mdash;10) don't seem to be doing any tasks (maybe in the future?), and all of his bots are categorised as "Wikipedia anti-vandal bots". Don't know why this happened, but I'm a little confused. Schfifty Three 21:16, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It is because someone added the categories to the template page used for *all* of the bots' user pages. The template pulls various information from subpages of each bot userpage where it is transcluded, which is why it is different for each of the bots.  Evidently someone changed it to add the categories.  As for the praise and the awards sections, they are for all the bots.  They just contain mostly ClueBot-related stuff, as it is the most popular of my bots.  People really should use editprotected to add categories to the bots' individual userpages.  And, yes, I generally create several accounts at once when I create extra ClueBot accounts.  So some of them are not used yet. (5, 7, 8, 9, and 10)  -- Cobi(t 18:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * -- Cobi(t 18:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Something interesting just happened
I have another comment to post. This revert was kind of unusual; the IP user deleted 13,924 characters, and ClueBot reverted & deleted 9,184 characters. Hmm...how did this happen? I thought that when ClueBot would revert a number of deleted characters by a user, it would restore the deleted amount. Schfifty Three 22:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * See this. It did exactly what it said in the edit summary.  "Reverting possible vandalism by 204.191.105.220 to version by Victoriaedwards."  The revision you seem to be thinking it reverted to was not by Victoriaedwards.  -- Cobi(t 18:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2008
Unwelcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to 4Kids TV, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ChinChongg. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: 4Kids TV was changed by ChinChongg (u) (t) deleting 15023 characters on 2008-07-30T08:55:18+00:00. Thank you. ChinChongg (talk) 08:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2008
Unwelcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to 4Kids TV, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ChinChongg. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: 4Kids TV was changed by ChinChongg (u) (t) deleting 15023 characters on 2008-07-30T08:55:18+00:00. Thank you. ChinChongg (talk) 08:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Vandal
I found this vandal: 24.242.49.211

He vandalized "Halo Wars" two times.

I fixed it, but please notify him.

--Ajoao4444 —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:54, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Clarification on the ClueBot III auto-archive bot
Hi there, just a few questions regarding the operation of your archive bot: Firstly, how do you use the archivenow parameter? Can I simply add it into the template, and it will archive my entire talk page, and then remove it again? Secondly, when using index=yes and wrapping the bot inside archive box, can I force the box to display my already-archived pages? Does index=yes create a page like this? What will the output text in the box look like (I like it as I have it now, but don't like the hassle of having to manually update it every so often). Finally, if I set archiveprefix=User talk:Lewisskinner/Archive (without a following slash) and format=M Y, will the bot archive to User talk:Lewisskinner/Archive/Jul 2008 or User_talk:Lewisskinner/Archive_Jul_2008? I hope you can help.  L.J.Skinner wot 12:18, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Without the final slash, it will be User talk:Lewisskinner/ArchiveJul 2008. If you want a space, you will have to put it in there.  If you want the slash, add a slash to the end of archiveprefix.  When the bot archives, it creates a page like this: User:ClueBot III/Indices/User talk:Cobi which is the output of Special:Prefixindex/archiveprefix, ordered by last edit (so the archives will be in the right order, from oldest to newest).  If you set index</tt> to yes, the template simply transcludes that page.
 * <tt>archivenow</tt> is so you can have a template like resolved and it will archive as soon as that template is added to a section instead of waiting for the section to completely die and be archived normally.
 * One last note, when specifying pages with spaces in them, leave the spaces in them and don't convert them to underscores. The bot has a little bit of trouble with underscores in it's template right now, though I am working on fixing that.
 * I hope I've been able to answer all your questions. -- Cobi(t 20:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * That's brilliant pal - ta! You've been really helpful :).   L.J.Skinner wot 22:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)